|
|
|
|
|
|
| NT, 2K -- memory and other hardware |
| Author |
Message |
Wayne Lewis
| | Posted on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 2:42 pm: | |
I understand that win 2k (based on NT) is more demanding on hardware than 9x. I know of several cases where memory that worked on 9x faialed on 2K. What I can't seem to find out is HOW and WHY 2K is more fuusy about hardware (espsecialy memory.) I have been told to look at the history of NT, but Google gives me nothing on this issue.
Does anyone here know about this issue, or could point me to a link that will explain it?
Thanks |
Moderator (Es)
Username: Es
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 8:50 pm: | |
As far as what works and what doesn't work with 2K or XP for that matter always check the Microsoft HQL for the hardware in question. Although the list is quite extensive I really have found for memory is to run it at very conservative settings especially during installation. Some memory might work better than others at default SPD settings especially in the case of cheap run of the mill memory.
More often than not even stubborn memory will run just fine at 3-3-3 settings in bios when "By SPD" Enabled in Bios will not. |
Wayne Lewis
| | Posted on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 11:07 pm: | |
So are you saying that if the memory system timing is set to x-3-3-3, memory that ran on 9x may be able to run on 2K with this slower setting (assuming SPD can be bypassed?) |
Wayne Lewis
| | Posted on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 11:24 pm: | |
Are you reffering to CL-2 vs. CL-3 memory, and adjusting the setting? |
Moderator (Es)
Username: Es
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, May 30, 2004 - 8:28 am: | |
Yes CL-3 setting instead of CL-2 (assuming SPD is bypassable) |
|
|
